You may be already aware by now of the ‘backlash’ on Peter Heehs’ biography of Sri Aurobindo: ‘The Many Lives…’ When faced with such a controversy, there is a general tendency in a certain kind of intelligentsia to take such reactions as ‘over-reaction’, ‘sentimentality’, etc and justify the diabolic nature of the writings by using terms such as ‘we should be broad-minded’, ‘Sri Aurobindo is not affected by these things’, ‘everyone has his freedom of expression’, ‘we should give people chance to change’ so on and so forth. The purpose of this note is to point out the fallacy of this argument in the present context.

Hence, put forth below are some reasons as to why the book is objectionable and the intent behind it a diabolic one.

The title of the book is itself a deceptively misleading one. Though to those familiar with Sri Aurobindo’s thought it may give an impression of a complex personality. But to the general reader (for whom the book is supposedly meant) this would most certainly mean a multiple personality, or worse still the hidden sides. Such a title may indicate that behind the known public life of Sri Aurobindo as a revolutionary and a yogi, there is a private side, a ‘human side,’ the side that is of ‘a commoner and as ordinary as you and me and the author is going to bring it out. Finally, the title may indicate a ‘multiple personality’, something that is generally used in a derogatory sense.

The author’s claim to ‘objectivity’ is not only invalid, it again carries an under-current which means; ‘the other biographies have been more of a sentimental devotee type’. Apart from this logic denigrating some well-known biographers whose sincerity cannot be questioned, this statement implies two things: First, the devotee biographers simply exaggerate certain qualities which are not really there. Now, our Mr. Objective will show us through his objectifying lens how they are wrong, that Sri Aurobindo is really not as great (read as divine) as they make him to be. It also implies by default that his words do not necessarily carry the same absolute authority as it did, that he can be flawed, mistaken and err as most of us human beings do! Well, this strikes the very foundation of yogic life wherein a disciple is supposed to have an implicit trust in the Guru’s words. But our Mr. Objective does not feel comfortable with it. So he must measure the Master’s stature with his scale and rod with exactness and thoroughness of a tailor and restitch his attire for us to see. He must tell us his true size and stature which is less than what the devotee ignorantly believes! [...]

The ‘Autobiographical Notes’ is a very recent example that contains a couple of letters that not only is in poor taste but also falsifies certain positions taken so far (pages 149-151). Future editions of this book need re-editing.

I have nothing more to say after this. I leave it now to each one’s wisdom. After all, in times as these, where it has become fashionable to trivialise the sacred and the best, this too may be permissible!! But somewhere within us we must be answerable if not to ourselves then to the many many devotees whose feelings should be at least of some meaning to us and, to the sacred trust that we hold on behalf of our Master. It is one thing to have human defects. It is quite another to point fingers at the Divine incarnate and conceal it as a great quality of the mind. The first is at worst natural and at best human, the second is at worst a betrayal and at best diabolic. That is all I have to say.

With utmost goodwill and love for Them who sacrificed Their life for us, alok

Shourie shows a propensity towards a subtle, not-so-positive characterisation of the religious experiences. Thus the early samadhi experiences become ‘symptoms’ and the seers are said to be ‘prone’ to certain experiences. All negative terms associated with pathologies figure in his descriptions of the seers though overtly he takes extra care to always address them with traditional respect. So, Shourie approvingly asks is not ‘the resulting state’ of Sri Ramakrishna’s longing for the vision of the Divine Mother ‘what Freud called an ‘auto-hypnotic’ state in his ‘Studies in Hysteria?'

With a rhetorical negativity, which is Shourie’s hallmark, he categorises the experience of Sri Ramakrishna: ‘Meaningless sounds become words. Words become messages. These become messages from the high’. [...] He avidly avoids any Indic framework in studying the sadhana of the seers.

Oct 17, 2016 - Manoj Das Gupta's policy of not rocking the boat even when the boat is about to be wrecked , as in the controversy over the Lives of Sri Aurobindo by Peter Heehs, makes him undoubtedly the most ...

Apr 15, 2012 - Caught in a row over his portrayal of Sri Aurobindo, American historian Peter Heehs is glad that his visa has been extended by a ... What is your response to the controversy your book has created?

Larger Issues of the "Lives of Sri Aurobindo" Controversy. The Heehs biography controversy is unfortunately a symptom of a much deeper crisis in the Integral Yoga community, with future repercussions which are ...

But he has written it as an inmate of the Sri Aurobindo Ashram – and he has abused the trust that the community had placed on him.6 ... controversy vividly capture the three strands of enquiry advanced in this book.

THE LIVES OF SRI AUROBINDO CONTROVERSY. Corrections to textual excerpts of The Lives of Sri Aurobindo by Peter Heehs. Author's Intent, Relativism of Reason, Spiritual Experience and the Modern Mind ...